Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Amrita Das Nee Kar vs Sri Piyas Kumar Das And Anr on 31 October, 2022
Form J(1) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present :
The Hon'ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri
CRR 2404 of 2022
Smt. Amrita Das nee Kar
Vs.
Sri Piyas Kumar Das and Anr.
Mr. Abhijit Ganguly
Mr. Subhashis Saha
....for the petitioner
Item No.12
Heard & Judgment on: 31.10.2022
Bibek Chaudhuri, J.
In a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure which was registered as Misc. Case No. 116 of 2019
learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court at Howrah disposed of an
application for interim maintenance directing the opposite
party /husband to pay maintenance allowance at the rate of
Rs.15,000/- per month for the minor child of the parties and
refusing to grant any interim maintenance in favour of the
petitioner on the ground holding, inter alia, that the petitioner
had independent source of income to maintain herself and he
used to work in a private company earning Rs.10,000/- per
month.
The said order dated 30th January, 2020 was assailed in
revision by the petitioner vide Criminal Revision No.30 of 2020
before the learned Sessions Judge, Howrah. The said revision
was taken up for hearing by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Fast Track, 2nd Court at Howrah and by her judgment
dated 30th April, 2022 the aforesaid revision was also dismissed
on contest.
It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner
that in the meantime, the petitioner had to leave her job in
order to look after her minor child. At present the petitioner has
no source of income and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to
get interim relief of maintenance from the opposite party.
Having heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and
on meticulous perusal of the impugned orders dated 30 th
January, 2020 and 30th April, 2022, I do not find any illegality or
material irregularity because of the fact that both the Courts
below found that the petitioner has been earning to maintain her
livelihood.
At this stage, the petitioner has come forward and submits
that she had left her job in order to look after her child. The
said fact has not been incorporated in the record of Misc. Case
No.116 of 2019.
Under such circumstances, while refusing to interfere with
the order impugned, the petitioner is given liberty to file
appropriate application before the trial Court, if so advised,
stating the changed circumstances regarding surrendering of
her job and present monetary status of the petitioner for
appropriate relief in the trial Court.
If such application is filed by the petitioner, the learned
Magistrate shall dispose of such application expeditiously giving
opportunity to both the parties for hearing.
With the above direction, the instant criminal revision is
disposed of.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)
